Feds Would Need Permission from Sheriffs in Bill Passed by Arizona Senate Committees
Arizona reining in the fed's. Its about damn time.
- Hot
- New
- Categories...
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
- Marketplace
- Members
- Store
- More...
"Any federal employee violating the law would be subject to prosecution on the following grounds:
1. Kidnapping, if an arrest or attempted arrest occurs.
2. Trespass, if a search or attempted search occurs.
3. Theft, if a seizure or attempted seizure occurs.
4. An applicable homicide offense, if loss of life occurs.
5. Any other applicable criminal offense prescribed in title 13."
Arizona could arrest a federal agent for example, but the state judge could never uphold the arrest or issue a warrant for the same, if the agent is acting in accordance with their duties and under federal statutes. Keep in mind, that there really isn't many federal statutes from a criminal perspective - I think most stem from the war on drugs, etc.
Establishes the United States Constitution, federal statutes, and treaties as "the supreme law of the land." It provides that these are the highest form of law in the United States legal system, and mandates that all state judges must follow federal law when a conflict arises between federal law and either a state constitution or state law of any state.
It doesn't really change anything anyway, County Sheriffs are always the highest law enforcement officer in the county, that has always been the case.
Example? They look at the Gadsden flag as the banner of the enemy. Serious beans - if you don't knuckle under to the mighty authority of the dotgov, you are the enemy - or to quote one former president - "If you're not with us, you're against us".
The Supremacy Clause is a clause within Article VI of the U.S. Constitution which dictates that federal law is the "supreme law of the land". This means that judges in every state must follow the Constitution, laws, and treatises of the federal government in matters which are directly or indirectly within the government's control. Under the doctrine of preemption, which is based on the Supremacy Clause, federal law preempts state law, even when the laws conflict. Thus, a federal court may require a state to stop certain behavior it believes interferes with, or is in conflict with, federal law. - See more at: http://litigation.findlaw.com/legal-syst...
Really, what this asserts is that Federal Agents' authority is inferior to the authority of that of authorized Arizona peacekeepers and that Federal Agents must bow to that authority unless the Federal Agents can make a _specific_ case for individual actions. They have to justify all their actions based on legitimate Federal oversight in order to ignore this law in a court of law.
The reality of this is that this is a win-win for Arizona because it will force Federal Agents to work with and respect Arizona law enforcement instead of high-handedly ignoring them as they have been doing all during Obama's tenure.
So, the key phrase in the legislation is, "A federal employee who is not certified as a peace officer in this state pursuant to section 13-3875 may not...". The only way this legislation would work is if Arizona Sheriffs stopped certifying feds as Peace Officers.
http://www.azleg.gov/ars/13/03875.htm
They will Not Like Having Their Power Limited.
Follow the Power and Control...
We live in interesting times.